Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

I was just thinking that SKY currently offer their HD Pack for £10.25 a month. SKY give you a free HD box without a HD activation fee. If you take the service for 12 months your shelling out £123.00 for just HD.

Virgin offer HD free however if you want HD you have to pay a £49.00 HD activation fee. Then if you want the SKY Premium channels you are £7.00 per month thereafter. Over a year your shelling out £133.00 for just HD. £10.00 more than SKY.

I know in terms of a like for like overall TV package Virgin are about £4.25 per month cheaper than SKY however I'm just comparing the HD elements of both companies packages.

Virgin aren't doing too badly out of HD. It seems they are front loading their costs to keep their HD looking "free".

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

How much extra does ESPN HD cost on Sky compared to Virgin XL?

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

Yes but in regards to this:

1- If you carry on with sky in the second year you will pay £123.

2- If you stay with VM and stay on the same pack ( XL ) you will only pay £84.

So in the second year if you stay with VM you will save £39 do i think that the front loading of the charge is worth it, as it is worth it in the long run.
Just my thought:erm:

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

God I hate these threads let's bash Sky let's look at every possible scenario , it's simple really Sky charge for HD but in some cases Sky can still be cheaper but in other situations VM can be, it really depends what you want.

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

£9.00 per month however for this price SKY gives you both ESPN HD and ESPN America HD.

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

Firstly, it doesn't seem to be a Sky-bashing thread. It's just comparing what's available and at what price.

Secondly, if you hate them then it's quite simple, don't click on them.

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

Totally agree. Over a 12 month period SKY edge it for value. Over 24 months Virgin are the winners by a saving of £29.00.

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

Hard to judge over 24 months most companies give you retention deals after 12 months if you consider leaving.

---------- Post added at 21:35 ---------- Previous post was at 21:34 ----------

I'm not having a go at Chad , but they are pointless because what works for one person , may not work for another.

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

I'll keep that in mind for when my latest contract runs out in September.

I'll be asking for 1 free Tivo and an upgrade to 100Mb or our old chum Rupert Murdoch and the boys will be getting a call from me looking for a bin lid for the side of my house:erm::D

Seriously though it was a price comparison website which brought this to my attention. I was surprised how much Virgin customers actually pay for HD in the initial 12 months if they take SKY Sports & Movies in HD.

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

That is why i posted that it is trying to balance out the facts that you have put and to add substance to the thread as well.

Yes we know this but how many customers call and get these deals if they are not in the know about them?

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

I always make an annual call it's suprising what these firms offer , Sky are giving months and months of free HD sub , I've lots of friends on 6 months free HD sub and some with sports and movies at Half price.

---------- Post added at 21:49 ---------- Previous post was at 21:46 ----------

What you need to do mate is work out what your requirements are Ie BB , Phone , television channels and then price both companies up.

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

Don't forget the £20 self install or £30 manned install fee on top of the £49 too

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

You definitely need to work it out for you personally. For me, sky would be much more expensive because I have 2 HD boxes, and no premium channels. So, that's roughly 20 pounds P/M extra for sky as against 6.50 for VM, by just adding a second HD box.

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

IMO its not really worth coming to VM for people who want more than just the basic pay tv HD as we have to pay £7 for Sky premium which is a reduced set of HD channels anyway. Might as well avoid the HD activation fee, pay £3.25 extra a month and get all premium HD channels and also more basic HD channels.

This off course assumes HD is the priority for the customer. I personally wouldn't go to Sky unless I absolutely had to..

Re: Is HD on with Virgin more expensive than SKY?
 

Also a VM sky premium HD subscriber with TIVO would pay 7.00 for sky premium hd and 3.00 for TiVo making it really not worthwhile if HD is your priority. 2 Sky Sports HD channels on VM compared to 4 on Sky , MGM HD , sky classics HD and Disney cinemagic HD available to sky movie/hd subscribers on sky only.